SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Zero Hedge reports
[May 12], in an embarrassing setback for the president, Senate Democrats in a 52-45 vote--short of the required 60 supporters--blocked a bill that would give President Barack Obama fast-track authority to expedite trade agreements through Congress, a major defeat for Obama and his allies who "say the measure is necessary to complete a 12-nation Pacific trade deal that is a centerpiece of the administration's economic agenda."
The passage failed after a leading pro-trade Democrat said he would oppose the bill: Ron Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said he would vote no and his loss was a major blow to hopes of attracting a sufficient number Democrats to get 60 "yes" votes in the chamber.
According to Reuters, the Senate vote was one of a series of obstacles to be overcome that hinged on the support of a handful of Democrats. The White House has launched a campaign blitz directed at them in support of granting the president authority to speed trade deals through Congress.
Fast-track legislation gives lawmakers the right to set negotiating objectives but restricts them to a yes-or-no vote on trade deals such as the TPP, a potential legacy-defining achievement for Obama.
[...]Why is Obama scrambling to ram the TPP bill through Congress as fast as possible?
[...]This enormous new treaty would tilt the playing field in the United States further in favor of big multinational corporations. Worse, it would undermine U.S. sovereignty.
[Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)] would allow foreign companies to challenge U.S. laws--and potentially to pick up huge payouts from taxpayers--without ever stepping foot in a U.S. court. Here's how it would work:
Imagine that the United States bans a toxic chemical that is often added to gasoline because of its health and environmental consequences. If a foreign company that makes the toxic chemical opposes the law, it would normally have to challenge it in a U.S. court. But with ISDS, the company could skip the U.S. courts and go before an international panel of arbitrators [read: corporate-friendly tribunal]. If the company won, the ruling couldn't be challenged in U.S. courts, and the arbitration panel could require American taxpayers to cough up millions--and even billions--of dollars in damages.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Wednesday May 13 2015, @07:10PM
I mean, we have Elizabeth Warren saying one set of provisions is in it, and Barack Obama saying something different is in it, but the Obama administration isn't letting the general public read it and is allowing Congresscritters to read it only in person and without taking notes.
That to me is sufficient grounds for me to assume it's nefarious. If it were good, they'd be proudly inviting people to take a look at the great deal they'd made. And any claims of "it's secret so the Chinese don't find out" is utter nonsense - many of the countries we're talking to are diplomatically close to China, and have most assuredly given Beijing a copy by now.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Wednesday May 13 2015, @08:24PM
there's a good reason that Congress exempts itself from many laws. There's good reason to gripe about them doing so, but one good reason for it is so that the adminstration can't tell Congress what to do.
Similarly, the complaints about activist judges are unfounded. The judiciary is a third branch of government, it is in no way subordinate to the executive nor the legislative.
Perhaps congress could subpoena a copy of the treaty.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @08:49PM
Some chapters of earlier versions have been leaked, [google.com] but you're right: The secrecy is a giant red flag; the current crop of trade agreements are damaging for Joe Average.
-- gewg_
(Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Wednesday May 13 2015, @09:14PM
Vastly more than sufficient grounds. In a democracy, led by the people, for the people's benefit, there is no room for this kind of opaqueness in legislation. AT ALL. As in, THERE IS LITERALLY NO JUSTIFICATION OF ANY KIND, WHATSOEVER, TO UNILATERALLY DISCUSS TRADE NEGOTIATIONS IN PRIVATE .
I'm under the distinct impression that most people properly place the TPP alongside all the secret documents and processes the NSA keeps in place to "protect the American way of life". In other words, it's impossible to see the TPP as anything other than flagrant, open, and egregious corruption on the part of our legislators.
If anybody is keeping track, I think we are at the place in Animal Farm where the pigs that walk on two feet are about to sell the Horse to the glue factory. We're the horse people, and the TPP is the receipt from the factory.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday May 13 2015, @11:02PM
Correction: This one is entirely on the part of our president and the half of our legislators that supported him. The other legislators who just shut it down deserve no blame for this (feel free to blame them for anything else they've done, of course).
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Adamsjas on Wednesday May 13 2015, @11:14PM
If for no other reason that the common man can not find an official version of the proposed treaty, It should NEVER pass.
Should it pass the Senate, it should be immediately challenged in the courts. This of course is hard to do, because you have to wait until you have been injured and therefore have standing, and slug-fest your way through the lower courts.
You have to contact your Senators or any Senators, really, because this affects all of us. You have to find out who those 45 in favor were and point out to them that they took an oath of office, and they have to stand for re-election and defend against recalls.